Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for
- Author or Editor: Debra L. Roter x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
Abstract
Objective—To identify communication patterns used by veterinarians during clinical appointments in companion animal practice.
Design—Cross-sectional descriptive study.
Sample Population—A random sample of 50 companion animal practitioners in southern Ontario and a convenience sample of 300 clients and their pets.
Procedure—For each practitioner, 6 clinical appointments (3 wellness appointments and 3 appointments related to a health problem) were videotaped. The Roter interaction analysis system was used to analyze the resulting 300 videotapes, and cluster analysis was used to identify veterinarian communication patterns.
Results—175 (58%) appointments were classified as having a biomedical communication pattern, and 125 (42%) were classified as having a biolifestyle-social communication pattern. None were classified as having a consumerist communication pattern. Twentythree (46%) veterinarians were classified as using a predominantly biomedical communication pattern, 19 (38%) were classified as using a mixed communication pattern, and 8 (16%) were classified as using a predominantly biolifestyle-social communication pattern. Pattern use was related to the type of appointment. Overall, 103 (69%) wellness appointments were classified as biolifestyle-social and 127 (85%) problem appointments were classified as biomedical. Appointments with a biomedical communication pattern (mean, 11.98 minutes) were significantly longer than appointments with a biolifestyle-social communication pattern (10.43 minutes). Median relationship-centered care score (ie, the ratio of client-centered talk to veterinarian-centered talk) was significantly higher during appointments with a biolifestyle-social communication pattern (1.10) than during appointments with a biomedical communication pattern (0.40).
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that veterinarians in companion animal practice use 2 distinct patterns of communication. Communication pattern was associated with duration of visit, type of appointment, and relationship-centeredness. Recognition of these communication patterns has implications for veterinary training and client and patient outcomes.
Abstract
Objective—To compare the clinical interview process, content of the medical dialog, and emotional tone of the veterinarian-client-patient interaction during wellness appointments and appointments related to a health problem in companion animal practice.
Design—Cross-sectional descriptive study.
Sample Population—A random sample of 50 companion animal practitioners in southern Ontario and a convenience sample of 300 clients and their pets.
Procedure—For each practitioner, 6 clinical appointments (3 wellness appointments and 3 problem appointments) were videotaped. The Roter interaction analysis system was used to analyze the resulting 300 videotapes.
Results—Wellness appointments were characterized by a broad discussion of topics, with 50% of data-gathering statements and 27% of client education statements related to the pet's lifestyle activities and social interactions. Wellness appointments included twice as much verbal interaction with the pet as did problem appointments, and the emotional atmosphere of wellness appointments was generally relaxed. There were more social talk, laughter, statements of reassurance, and compliments directed toward the client and pet. In contrast, during problem appointments, 90% of the data gathering and client education focused on biomedical topics. Coders rated veterinarians as hurried during 30 of the 150 (20%) problem appointments; they rated clients as anxious during 39 (26%) problem appointments and as emotionally distressed during 21 (14%).
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that veterinarian-client-patient communication differed between wellness and problem appointments. Owing to the emphasis on biomedical content during problem appointments, veterinarians may neglect lifestyle and social concerns that could impact patient management and outcomes, such as client satisfaction and adherence to veterinarian recommendations.
Abstract
Objective—To measure veterinarian satisfaction with companion animal visits through an adaptation of a previously validated physician visit satisfaction scale and to identify demographic, personality, appointment, and communication factors that contribute to veterinarian visit satisfaction.
Design—Cross-sectional descriptive study.
Sample—Random sample of 50 companion animal practitioners in southern Ontario, Canada, and convenience sample of 300 clients and their pets.
Procedures—For each practitioner, 6 clinical appointments were videotaped, and the resulting 300 videotapes were analyzed by use of the Roter interaction analysis system. The physician satisfaction scale, Rosenberg self-esteem scale, and interpersonal reactivity index were used to measure veterinarian visit satisfaction, self-esteem, and empathy, respectively. Linear regression analysis was conducted to study the relationship between factors and veterinarian visit satisfaction.
Results—Veterinarian visit satisfaction ranged from 1 to 5 (mean ± SD, 3.97 ± 0.99) and differed significantly between wellness appointments (mean scale score, 4.13) and problem appointments (mean scale score, 3.81). Various elements of client and veterinarian communication as well as personality measures of veterinarian self-esteem and empathy were associated with veterinarian satisfaction. The specific factors differed depending on the nature of the appointment.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that veterinarian visit–specific satisfaction is enhanced through the use of communication that builds relationships with clients and is associated with degrees of veterinarian empathetic concern and veterinarian self-esteem. The implications extend to overall job satisfaction and its potential link to the health and well-being of individual veterinarians.
Abstract
Objective—To describe the relationship between veterinarian and client genders and veterinarian-client-patient communication.
Design—Cross-sectional descriptive study.
Sample—Random sample of 50 companion animal practitioners in southern Ontario and a convenience sample of 300 clients and their pets.
Procedures—For each practitioner, 6 clinical appointments were videotaped, and the resulting 300 videotapes were analyzed with the Roter interaction analysis system (RIAS). Linear regression was conducted to study the relationship between demographic factors, measures of veterinarian-client-patient communication, and gender of the veterinarian and client.
Results—Female veterinarians conducted more relationship-centered appointments, provided more positive and rapport-building statements, talked more to the patient, and were perceived as less hurried or rushed, compared with male veterinarians. Clients were more likely to provide lifestyle-social information to female veterinarians. Same-gender veterinarian-client interactions were relationship centered and included client provision of more lifestyle-social information.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Gender influenced veterinarian-client-patient communication, and previously described physician gender differences in medical communication were largely replicated in the veterinary context.
Abstract
Objective—To identify specific components of veterinarian- client-patient communication during clinical appointments in companion animal practice.
Design—Cross-sectional descriptive study.
Sample Population—A random sample of 50 companion animal practitioners in southern Ontario and a convenience sample of 300 clients and their pets.
Procedure—For each practitioner, 6 clinical appointments (3 wellness appointments and 3 appointments related to a health problem) were videotaped, and the Roter interaction analysis system (RIAS) was used to analyze the resulting 300 videotapes. Statements made during each appointment were classified by means of a communication framework reflecting the 4 essential tasks of the appointment (ie, data gathering, education and counseling, relationship building, and activation and partnership).
Results—57% of the veterinarians contacted (50/87) and 99% of the clients contacted agreed to participate in the study. Mean duration of the appointments was 13 minutes. Typically, veterinarians contributed 62% of the total conversation and clients contributed 38%. Fifty-four percent of the veterinarian interaction was with the client, and 8% was with the pet. Data gathering constituted 9% of the veterinarian-to-client communication and was primarily accomplished through closed-ended questioning; 48% of veterinarian-to-client communication involved client education and counseling, 30% involved relationship building, and 7% involved activation and partnership (the remaining 6% constituted orientation).
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that the RIAS was a reliable method of assessing the structure, process, and content of veterinarianclient-patient communication and that some veterinarians do not use all the tools needed for effective communication. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;225:222–229)
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate veterinarian-client communication and veterinarian and client satisfaction with veterinary visits before and after veterinarians underwent a 6-month communication skills training program in a practice setting.
DESIGN Case-based pretest-posttest intervention study.
SAMPLE 1 purposely selected companion-animal practice.
PROCEDURES The practice team (3 veterinarians, 5 veterinary technicians, 1 receptionist, and 1 office manager) participated in a 6-month educational program (intervention) that included interactive communication modules, individual coaching, and a communication laboratory. For each of the veterinarians, 6 appointments were video recorded and 30 additional clients completed a visit satisfaction survey both before and after the intervention. The Roter interaction analysis system was used to analyze the video-recorded appointments.
RESULTS After the intervention, appointments were 5.4 minutes longer and veterinarians asked 60% fewer closed-ended lifestyle-social questions, provided 1.4 times as much biomedically related client education, and used 1.5 and 1.25 times as much facilitative and emotional rapport communication, respectively, compared with before the intervention. Clients provided veterinarians with 1.3 times as much biomedically related information and engaged in twice as much social conversation. After the intervention, veterinarians perceived their clients as complaining less and being more personable and trusting, and clients felt more involved in the appointment and reported that the veterinarian expressed greater interest in their opinion.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results indicated that the intervention resulted in veterinarians who spent more time educating and building rapport with their clients and facilitating client input in an unhurried environment, which enhanced overall veterinarian visit satisfaction and various aspects of client visit satisfaction.
